Case Law Details
Vishranti Gruh Vs Commissioner of Income Tax Officer (ITAT Pune)
Introduction: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in Pune recently passed a crucial ruling in the case of Vishranti Gruh Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Officer. The case revolved around the cancellation of the Trust’s registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act due to failure to furnish evidence of genuine activities. The Tribunal decided in favor of re-adjudication.
The Appellant’s Grievance: Vishranti Gruh, the appellant in this case, had its provisional registration under section 12AB cancelled by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune. The bone of contention was that the Trust failed to produce satisfactory evidence to prove the genuineness of its activities, thereby losing its regular registration status.
The Notice Remained Unattended: The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) had asked the Trust to furnish specific information by a set deadline, failure upon which led to the cancellation of its provisional and regular registration. This aspect of the case emphasizes the importance of adhering to the deadlines set by authorities.
Interpretation of Law and Directive Principles: The Tribunal noted that the objective behind provisions like section 12AB and recognition under section 80G is to facilitate the flow of benefits to society through charitable trusts. These provisions stem from the Directive Principles of State Policy in the Constitution of India, aiming to foster socio-economic welfare.
In the Interest of Justice: The Tribunal took a compassionate view, noting that Income Tax laws are welfare legislations, not penal. Consequently, the Tribunal offered the appellant another opportunity to remedy its shortcomings, thereby setting aside the impugned order and remitting the matter back for fresh consideration.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT PUNE
1. The appellant agitates the impugned order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune [for short “CIT(E)”] dt. 30/11/2023 passed u/s 12AB(1)(b)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [for short “the Act”] thereby rejecting to grant regular registration and cancelled the provisional registration granted to it.
2. Without reproducing the grounds raised, it shall suffice to state that, the sole and substantive grievance of the appeal is directed against the cancellation of provisional registration and rejection to grant regular registration of 12AB recognition to the appellant.
3. Heard the rival contentions and perused the case records in the light of rule 18 of Income Tax Appellate Rules, 1963 and we note that, the appellant assessee is a trust which has vide Form No.10AB dt. 12/05/2022 made an application to the respondent under clause (iii) of section 12(1)(ac) of the Act thereby seeking regular/final registration u/s 12AB of the Act. After perusal of said application the Ld. CIT(E) vide solitary notice dt. 03/09/2022 called upon the appellant to produce certain key information by 19/09/2022 so as to enable him to verify the genuineness of its activities. This notice however remained unattended by the assessee. For the reasons, the application by the impugned order is rejected by the registering authority Ld. CIT(E) for his failure to arrive at positive satisfaction about the genuineness of activities of the appellant trust in the absence of persuasive evidences.
4. It has to be appreciated that the purpose of the provisions for registration of trust u/s 12AB and granting of recognition u/s 80G of the Act, derives their spirit from the Directive Principles of State Policy enshrined in the Constitution of India. The Govt. of India makes every endeavour to provide welfare to one and all in the society at large, and in view thereof the registration for public charitable trusts are given in order to ensure that through these charitable trusts benefits flows to entire society, thus the Directive Principles of State Policy are achieved. These provisions for the trust registration u/s 12AB and granting of recognition u/s 80G of the Act enhance the socio economic welfare in the society. Furthermore, the Income Tax laws are welfare legislations and not penal in nature. Therefore, in the interest of justice and considering all the afore-stated observations, we are of the considered view that, the appellant deserves reasonable one more opportunity to make good the defects/shortcomings. In view hereof, without offering our comment on merits of the case, we deem it appropriate set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for de-nova consideration.
5. Needless to state that, the appellant trust shall not seek any unreasoned adjournment and shall co-operate with the Ld. CIT(E) in this remand proceedings. Since the appellant has undertaken to adduce necessary and requisite evidences in support of its claim so as to enable the Ld. CIT(E) to form a reasonable conclusion in accordance with the application law, we direct the Ld. registering authority to dispose of the appeal after according not more than two effective hearings to the appellant trust.
6. In result, the appeal is ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE as above.
In terms of rule 34 of ITAT Rules, this order is pronounced in open court on this Thursday 03rd day of August, 2023.
